The Quizbowl Resource Center

It could, if we could clone a few Colby Burnetts and Mike Bentleys.

I will be interested to see the bracketing for this tournament. Given there'll be 10 brackets, there is a high chance of some varaince with regards to teams being split into balanced pools. I know that pooling by reputation bodes ill for my teams as we tend to be viewed as a middling program.

Woody Paige wrote:I will be interested to see the bracketing for this tournament. Given there'll be 10 brackets, there is a high chance of some varaince with regards to teams being split into balanced pools. I know that pooling by reputation bodes ill for my teams as we tend to be viewed as a middling program.

Balanced pools. Just hope you are in Wheaton North's bracket if you know what I mean.

I do know what you mean...in all fairness, however, this will be the first tournament for many of these teams, who may also have barely started league play, so seeding is even more difficult.

Now...if Auburn, St. Ignatius, Loyola, and Stevenson end up in the same bracket, then that's another matter entirely

Why is Stevenson not on the list? I know Kevin was on here asking about Kickoffs, so I thought they'd be coming.

If I had to make 10 brackets, these are probably the teams that should be split up:

Stevenson (assuming they come)
Loyola A
Auburn A
Lisle
New Trier A
St. Ignatius
Fremd A
Wheaton Warrenville South A
Barrington A
St. Viator A

No offense to Viator but why are they on this list?

When I tally the list, if I figure in Loyola as 3 teams, I get 55. So, clearly there've been some additions to the list sent last week.

BGSO wrote:No offense to Viator but why are they on this list?

OK, they aren't great sans Dan-Don, but who else can go up there? The only team that I probably should've included was Culver A, because I wasn't thinking. If I take Viator off the list then I have to take WWS off too (they had a lower bonus conversion at Ultima). If IMSA was coming, then I'd put them up there too. I also wonder where Maine South is this weekend.

Maine South is probably at the Loyola-Maine South football game

Also, don't underestimate the two Napervilles.

mlaird wrote:

BGSO wrote:No offense to Viator but why are they on this list?

OK, they aren't great sans Dan-Don, but who else can go up there? The only team that I probably should've included was Culver A, because I wasn't thinking. If I take Viator off the list then I have to take WWS off too (they had a lower bonus conversion at Ultima). If IMSA was coming, then I'd put them up there too. I also wonder where Maine South is this weekend.

Um....

How about BG?

Edit: BG had two players perform very well at Solo. Matt Wilber went 5-2, including an impressive 6-9 showing against Jeremiah. Greg Ward may have gone 4-3, but his 3 losses were by a combined three points, with two of those coming against noted good players Zach Blumenfeld and Greg D. from Lisle. His third loss was to Joe from Maine South, who has improved a ton, and featured Greg negging Buchanan for Pierce, Newfoundland for Baffin Island, and Othello for Iago, all on the first line. Also, WWS only had a lower conversion because Quinn was not in attendance for the whole day.

The biggest question I have is whether or not Matt will be playing with Varsity. He is only a Sophomore, so tradition would deem that he will not play. However, it will be hard for Park to ignore the fact that he reached the desperation shot. Either way, BG deserves to on that list.

BG MSL Champs wrote:How about BG?

Edit: BG had two players perform very well at Solo.

Ok just because players performed well at solo doesn't mean their whole team is solid.

Also I promise to moderate as fast as I can so we can get through quickly

Also isn't Wheaton North playing at their own kickoff? I neglected to see them on the list.

mlaird wrote:Why is Stevenson not on the list? I know Kevin was on here asking about Kickoffs, so I thought they'd be coming.

If I had to make 10 brackets, these are probably the teams that should be split up:

Stevenson (assuming they come)
Loyola A
Auburn A
Lisle
New Trier A
St. Ignatius
Fremd A
Wheaton Warrenville South A
Barrington A
St. Viator A

Lisle will be sans Greg, so probably should not be on this list.

Well, unfortunately, I'm certain that Mrs. Kidd does not know all of these things, and won't seed according to which players won't be there. I'm also pretty certain WN will be seeded uncharacteristicly high.

MoCity02 wrote:

mlaird wrote:Why is Stevenson not on the list? I know Kevin was on here asking about Kickoffs, so I thought they'd be coming.

If I had to make 10 brackets, these are probably the teams that should be split up:

Stevenson (assuming they come)
Loyola A
Auburn A
Lisle
New Trier A
St. Ignatius
Fremd A
Wheaton Warrenville South A
Barrington A
St. Viator A

Lisle will be sans Greg, so probably should not be on this list.

Actually, I ended up convincing my band director that it was ok for me to go to quizbowl instead of IMEA. Without bloodshed, too.

mlaird wrote:Well, unfortunately, I'm certain that Mrs. Kidd does not know all of these things, and won't seed according to which players won't be there. I'm also pretty certain WN will be seeded uncharacteristicly high.

I can send her the topic if you're interested.

I think one could also make a case for OPRF being on that list.

Anyways... is Stevenson coming to this?

Bonito wrote:Without bloodshed

That's always a good thing, as is you guys coming to this at full strength.

mlaird wrote:

BGSO wrote:No offense to Viator but why are they on this list?

OK, they aren't great sans Dan-Don, but who else can go up there? The only team that I probably should've included was Culver A, because I wasn't thinking. If I take Viator off the list then I have to take WWS off too (they had a lower bonus conversion at Ultima). If IMSA was coming, then I'd put them up there too. I also wonder where Maine South is this weekend.

WWS was also missing Quinn for half the day. Additionally, I've been told that Viator will be missing at least 1 player (and probably 2) for Kickoff. When it was suggested that Viator call up some of its "superstar" sophomores who went to ACE camp (granted they're not like Marcel/Nolan/Lloyd/Ben), I;ve been told that someone (who shall remain nameless) said, "That's just not done. I mean, imagine if they encountered Rockford Auburn. They'd never want to play again." This person has never coached a match against or attended a tournament with Auburn. Furthermore, another certain person is being asked to take the f/s to Kaneland F/S (/shudder/). Long story short, Culver A definitely deserves a bracket and possibly BG. At the expense of who? Maybe Barrington, Fremd, or Viator.

EDIT: coherence

well, stevenson was expecting to go to this, but apparently our registration got lost in the mail, so we will not be going. this really sucks too because we were excited to play this.

drose4prez wrote:well, stevenson was expecting to go to this, but apparently our registration got lost in the mail, so we will not be going. this really sucks too because we were excited to play this.

You must be kidding. Has your coach actually said, "We're not going to Kick-Off"? Or are you inferring based on the week-old list I posted which doesn't even contain the host school.

Woody Paige wrote:

drose4prez wrote:well, stevenson was expecting to go to this, but apparently our registration got lost in the mail, so we will not be going. this really sucks too because we were excited to play this.

You must be kidding. Has your coach actually said, "We're not going to Kick-Off"? Or are you inferring based on the week-old list I posted which doesn't even contain the host school.

Well today I saw that we weren't one on of the field updates so I asked my coach to confirm that we were in fact going. He said that somehow our registration didn't go through and there was already a wait list so there was no chance we were going. He had already made bus plans and other preparations for the tournament, so he had no idea we weren't registered.

Good luck to everyone at Kickoffs tomorrow!

So, two questions:
1.) What happened?
2.) Did Barrington HS actually qualify for the HSNCT by making the playoffs? For those not privy to the conversation, Herr Blessman of Culver said that 9 teams qualify from a 60-team tournament and every team eliminated in the round of 16 is technically tied for 9th place....

Paging Jeff Hoppes....

That's what it sounded like, on that note, Is this the most teams that have ever qualified for a HSNCT at once?

I do believe the top 16 teams all qualified, based on the fact that I was informed that we qualified, despite losing our first afternoon match in an intense 305-280 game with New Trier. Unfortunately we couldn't stay around to see the finals so I don't know who won. I know Loyola had the most points in the morning, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

Loyola claimed the Championship over Auburn, while Ignatius beat OPRF for 3rd place. Our games against Ignatius and Auburn were excellent, with us and deveau neck-and-neck for like 17 and the Auburn game coming down to the last TU, which just so favorably happened to be music, so Marcel picked it up.

Playoff seeds: 1 Loyola A, 2 Naperville Central, 3 Auburn A, 4 St. Ignatius, 5 New Trier A, 6 Lisle A, 7 Fremd A, 8 Buffalo Grove A, 9 Wheaton-Warrenville South A, 10 OPRF A, 11 Culver A, 12 Latin, 13 St. Viator A, 14 Carmel A, 15 Barrington A, 16 Libertyville.

First round of playoffs: Loyola A 475, Libertyville 190; Buffalo Grove A 305, WWS A 235; New Trier A 305, Latin 250; St. Ignatius 480, St. Viator A 110; Lisle A 270, Culver A 260; Auburn A 320, Carmel A 190; OPRF A 275, Fremd A 190; Naperville Central 365, Barrington A 255.

Second round of playoffs: Loyola A 350, Buffalo Grove A 215; St. Ignatius 315, New Trier 275; Auburn A 270, Lisle A 220; OPRF A 340, Naperville Central 250.

Third round of playoffs: Loyola A 355, St. Ignatius 235; Auburn A 375, OPRF 245.

Finals: Loyola A 280, Auburn A 255. Third place: St. Ignatius 285, OPRF A 270.

Morning results will be posted to the IHSSBCA site sometime soon.

I saw a lot of things that I have comments on, mostly good, but they will be saved for after I have gotten some sleep. Thanks to Wheaton North for hosting a well-run tournament.

Morning results here (SQBS, but no individual stats)

Playoff results here (nothing that I didn't already say just above)

were no individual stats kept?

jdeliverer wrote:were no individual stats kept?

Unfortunately the SQBS input they used was quite primitive. There were no individual stats and more importantly no bonus conversion.

jdeliverer wrote:were no individual stats kept?

Correct.

I had an interesting brief exchange with Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor about this. He was in my room for the first round, when I opened my folder to find no proper scoresheet, only a half-sheet to put the final score on. I said something offhandedly like "Oh, I guess we're not keeping individual stats", and he was kind enough to inform me that "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats." For 10 points, count the things wrong with that statement, to include but not be limited to the multiple instances of falsehood, condescension, and bad reasoning.

jonah wrote:"We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats."

I don't know of any way teams can register multiple teams for tournaments so that everyone can play. Clearly, there's no way that coaches can register more than one team for a tournament.

jonah wrote:

jdeliverer wrote:were no individual stats kept?

Correct.

I had an interesting brief exchange with Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor about this. He was in my room for the first round, when I opened my folder to find no proper scoresheet, only a half-sheet to put the final score on. I said something offhandedly like "Oh, I guess we're not keeping individual stats", and he was kind enough to inform me that "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats." For 10 points, count the things wrong with that statement, to include but not be limited to the multiple instances of falsehood, condescension, and bad reasoning.

Hmmm.... Who is this nebulous "we coaches" he refers to? Are you sure he wasn't talking about some sort of video game-related group called the "Wii Coaches"? It'd make as much, if not more, sense.
And you know what really encourages me to play my best players? The chance to win a game. I've never ever listened to the top toss-up scorer numbers at a tournament and regretted a substitution decision that may have cost one of my players the chance for a higher placement since they didn't play the whole time. Of course, with the aid of good scorekeeping and computers, you could just figure out the top players based in tossup points per TU heard. This scheme was employed at the Septemberist and Thomas Yu won the high scorer award, despite having fewer total points than Lauren from Loyola. You see, Thomas subbed out periodically, as did everyone on the Barrington teams.
But,I guess I'm just out of step and out of touch with the Wii coaches.

This was a fun tournament. Congrats to Loyola on its victory. Comments to come later...

Auburn A stats went (these are stats I just have on my sheets, so there's roughly a total +/- 2 TU margin of error for Zahed's tossups, in total):

Morning:

Player, Class: 15's, 10's, points per game

Zahed Haseeb, Senior: 1-32, 67 ppg
Maddie Witt, Junior: 2-10, 26 ppg
Jordan Hoffmann,Senior: 2-8, 22 ppg
Abid Haseeb, Sophomore: 4-2, 16 ppg
Filip Milovanovic, Sophomore: 1-5, 13 ppg

Playoffs:

Zahed: 1-22, 57.5 ppg (I'm pretty sure I'm missing 1 or 2 tossups from the Final. I stopped keeping track properly around the latter portion of it)
Abid: 2-2, 12.5 ppg
Maddie: 1-3, 11.25 ppg
Filip: 0-3, 7.5 ppg
Jordan: 1-1, 6.25 ppg


EDIT: To fix some stats, and to add Serbian kid

Jacopo Robusti wrote:This was a fun tournament. Congrats to Loyola on its victory. Comments to come later...

Auburn A stats went (these are stats I just have on my sheets, so there's roughly a total +/- 2 TU margin of error for Zahed's tossups, in total):

Morning:

Player, Class: 15's, 10's, points per game

Zahed Haseeb, Senior: 1-32, 67 ppg
Maddie Witt, Junior: 2-10, 26 ppg
Jordan Hoffmann,Senior: 2-8, 22 ppg
Abid Haseeb, Sophomore: 4-2, 16 ppg
Filip Milovanovic, Sophomore: 1-5, 13 ppg

Playoffs:

Zahed: 1-22, 57.5 ppg (I'm pretty sure I'm missing 1 or 2 tossups from the Final. I stopped keeping track properly around the latter portion of it)
Abid: 2-2, 12.5 ppg
Maddie: 1-3, 11.25 ppg
Jordan: 1-1, 6.25 ppg

EDIT: To fix some stats.

Flipmaster surely wasn't a zero in the playoffs...

jonah wrote:

jdeliverer wrote:were no individual stats kept?

Correct.

I had an interesting brief exchange with Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor about this. He was in my room for the first round, when I opened my folder to find no proper scoresheet, only a half-sheet to put the final score on. I said something offhandedly like "Oh, I guess we're not keeping individual stats", and he was kind enough to inform me that "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats." For 10 points, count the things wrong with that statement, to include but not be limited to the multiple instances of falsehood, condescension, and bad reasoning.

For schools/teams looking to move up from semi-walkover status, the availability of individual stats would be a plus, as: 1) many such programs would gain benchmarking information that they don't already compile and 2) it would provide an avenue for recognition for good players on so-so teams.

Jacopo Robusti wrote:This was a fun tournament. Congrats to Loyola on its victory. Comments to come later...

Auburn A stats went (these are stats I just have on my sheets, so there's roughly a total +/- 2 TU margin of error for Zahed's tossups, in total):

Morning:

Player, Class: 15's, 10's, points per game

Zahed Haseeb, Senior: 1-32, 67 ppg
Maddie Witt, Junior: 2-10, 26 ppg
Jordan Hoffmann,Senior: 2-8, 22 ppg
Abid Haseeb, Sophomore: 4-2, 16 ppg
Filip Milovanovic, Sophomore: 1-5, 13 ppg

Playoffs:

Zahed: 1-22, 57.5 ppg (I'm pretty sure I'm missing 1 or 2 tossups from the Final. I stopped keeping track properly around the latter portion of it)
Abid: 2-2, 12.5 ppg
Maddie: 1-3, 11.25 ppg
Jordan 2-1 10ppg
Filip: 0-3, 7.5 ppg



EDIT: To fix some stats, and to add Serbian kid

Thanks a lot for doing this, Abid.
Did Filip really not get any powers in the playoffs? And, I know I (Hoffmann) was at least 2-1 in the playoffs, (10 ppg), I might have been 2-2.

Congratulations to Loyola, it was really nice seeing that Illinois is so competitive.

jonah wrote:

jdeliverer wrote:were no individual stats kept?

Correct.

I had an interesting brief exchange with Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor about this. He was in my room for the first round, when I opened my folder to find no proper scoresheet, only a half-sheet to put the final score on. I said something offhandedly like "Oh, I guess we're not keeping individual stats", and he was kind enough to inform me that "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats."

If they were going to discourage beating down teams, then why would they use PPG as the only way to seed the playoffs? That leads to a lot more motivation to score a lot of points against bad teams than keeping individual stats does. If anything, keeping individual stats does the opposite, as it lets people who are seeding tournaments in the future know why your team scored less points if you did indeed pull your best player.

Next year, this should not be a decision left to the host. The IHSSBCA should require individual statistics be kept, and if the host will not oblige, then do not let them host. It seems pretty simple to me.

On a separate note, how were the questions received? I read these questions to a field that was not particularly satisfied, so I hope it went better back in Illinois.

Heh, Wii Coaches...

Its just the little things like this that show you how far Illinois still has to go.

jonah wrote:
...Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor... "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats."

I had this guy as a moderator at Solo. We had a brief discussion on formats where he stated his preference for IHSA format. His reasoning? The 4-5 part bonuses with the long conferral times "allow the students to learn from each other while they play". He also said pyramidal formats were unfair because they favored better teams. I just started nodding and saying "hm" at that point.

Chametz wrote:

jonah wrote:
...Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor... "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats."

I had this guy as a moderator at Solo. We had a brief discussion on formats where he stated his preference for IHSA format. His reasoning? The 4-5 part bonuses with the long conferral times "allow the students to learn from each other while they play". He also said pyramidal formats were unfair because they favored better teams. I just started nodding and saying "hm" at that point.

Oh heaven forbid!

Sometimes I wonder why people seem so backward and/or obstinate in this state. Most of the stories I hear about coaches and whatnot are quite unbelievable.

Chametz wrote:

jonah wrote:
...Mike Sacks from Homewood-Flossmoor... "We coaches have decided to move away from keeping statistics, because it encourages people to always play their best players to pad the stats."

I had this guy as a moderator at Solo. We had a brief discussion on formats where he stated his preference for IHSA format. His reasoning? The 4-5 part bonuses with the long conferral times "allow the students to learn from each other while they play". He also said pyramidal formats were unfair because they favored better teams. I just started nodding and saying "hm" at that point.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Unreal. It's true, though. Pyramidal format favors the more knowledgable team. I know people here hate sports analogies, but I can only guess the NFL went through the same sort of complaints when they discriminated against weak-legged kickers by moving the uprights off the goal line and into the back of the endzone.

You know what the worst part is? Mike Sacks is a well-mannered, intelligent, nice guy. It bothers me a lot that he has those opinions, because unlike some other coaches, he's actually worthy of quite a bit of respect (personality-based, at least.)

That being said, the tournament at Homewood-Flossmoor that I remember was, I believe, 6 or 7 rounds total (we lost in the championship game) of 16 TU/bon each.

cornfused wrote:You know what the worst part is? Mike Sacks is a well-mannered, intelligent, nice guy. It bothers me a lot that he has those opinions, because unlike some other coaches, he's actually worthy of quite a bit of respect (personality-based, at least.)

That being said, the tournament at Homewood-Flossmoor that I remember was, I believe, 6 or 7 rounds total (we lost in the championship game) of 16 TU/bon each.

Also, I think that many of his opinions are being taken out of context. Mike Sacks, based on an article that he wrote for the IHSSBCA newsletter, is not actually against good quizbowl per se. He believes that it has its place as a way to test the elite teams in the state, and he encourages those with good teams to play good quizbowl.

His problem is that he is a member of the "I would rather have 500 bad schools than 10 good ones" group. Because of this, and the fact that he views pyramidal questions as inaccessible to the masses, he believes that the Illinois format should be the one used for the state tournaments. He recognizes that the majority of teams would not like the transition, and thus is against it.

While this may not be the best opinion, it is certainly better than the "pyramidal quizbowl is evil" opinion that is going around the state. He has also seemed very open minded about the whole issue when I have spoken with him. He has said that if good quizbowl is proven to be accessible to the masses at occasions like Kickoffs, then he would certainly consider using it for the state tournament.

cornfused wrote: That being said, the tournament at Homewood-Flossmoor that I remember was, I believe, 6 or 7 rounds total (we lost in the championship game) of 16 TU/bon each.

When I read for H-F last year, they went all-out Illinois format (30/30 with bonuses having variable numbers of parts). From looking at the questions he wrote, it's clear he has an attitude that quizbowl should be FUNN. (I can elaborate with questions from said tournament, if you want/the moderators will allow it.)

The nomination form for Team Illinois is up. Turnabout invitations were emailed out a few weeks ago. The newsletter will be out in the next couple of days.

Also, detailed conversion stats are up for Scobol Solo. Feel free to discuss them here.

Not that it would really matter to any of you, but I think the H-F guy is writing the Fremd tournament as well.

Yes, he is writing the Fremd tournaments this year.

Wait, Coach Sacks is writing the Fremd tournament? Varsity and Frosh/Soph? This is a curious development. Hopefully it's an upgrade over the Questions Bank questions we heard last year.